Peace and Conflict studies can be defined as the interdisciplinary inquiry into war as human condition and peace as human potential. For example, this is not far from social anthropology; I went to the middle-east to study Peace and Conflict, but I found much more about the latter than the first, which is lacking. Their mindset is tormented by continually and daily slaughter and old hatreds living over generations. Peace must be the goal, but unfortunately, war is the current thought.

F.eg is an example of interdisciplinary statement describing the war as a sort of mindset (not unlike anger; A crazed rage that never goes away. Not unlike the berserkers of ancient vikings who never stopped warring, and was only stopped by outside interfering (Christiany).) and peace as what SHOULD at least be the goal. A very humanetic and caring philosophy says supporters, but critics often hit it for being very or too pacifistic and biased to peace as the only solution and war only as a something alike a psychic condition, unwilling to see the possibilites of victory through military means.